Lynch v. Alexander’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The loss to parents from the untimely death of a devoted child is not to be minimized.” (citation omitted). These are intangibles, the value of which cannot be determined by any fixed yardstick. Their loss to the beneficiaries must be estimated by the jury in the exercise of their sound judgment under all of the facts and circumstances of the case. We cannot say that the size of the verdict is such as to indicate passion or prejudice on the part of the jury. It is in the province of the jury to determine amounts to be allowed and a verdict should not be disturbed unless it is so flagrantly excessive as to raise a presumption that it was the result of passion and prejudice and not of sober, reflective judgment.... Although the amount of the verdict might be higher than heretofore awarded in this Court, we do not regard the verdict as ‘monstrous’ or ‘plainly unjust.’ There has not been a single trial event or evidentiary item, pointed out to us, which might have induced the jury to act out of passion or prejudice.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 74 F. Supp. 2d 548 - Jimenez Ex Rel. Estate of Jimenez v. Chrysler Corp.

2. ““The test, therefore, is not whether a guest, knowing that the driver’s conduct is improper, has a reasonable opportunity to leave the automobile, but whether a reasonable oppoytunity being afforded, a person in the exercise of ordinary care would have done so under the circumstances. Van Fleet v. Heyler, 51 Cal. App. (2d) 719, 125 P. (2d) 586 .””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hiott v. Bishop